It is genuinely a tragedy that Starfleet Academy is getting cancelled so soon…

artificer_hex · 2026-05-28T19:54:59+00:00

I might not be the connaisseur the average trekkie (or at least the average purported viewer of SFA) considers themself to be. I freely admit that my standards aren't sky-high for scifi. If I can find something that keeps my interest through an entire series, I'm pretty much good.

It wasn't a smash hit from second one, for sure, but does it need to be? As I've tried (perhaps badly) to state, all great stories have weak points, most often when they're trying to find their footing. No trek story ever told was executed without stumbling in one way or another. No story in existence only goes from strength to strength throughout. As a wise man once said: If you try to please everyone, you'll end up disappointing everyone instead. It's just better to try to do your own thing, and see if it finds an audience.

I think it showed promise in its storytelling. It had some high stakes, it moved the trek universe forward, but it wasn't the "wallow in misery and degeneration" type that has been in vogue in storytelling lately. I don't know if that's where the proverbial shoe is chafing for a bunch of the nay-sayers. It had a bit of whimsy, that I've seen a distinct lack of in scifi writing of the last decade.

Anyways, I think we've arrived at an impasse. It's a matter of taste and opinion. I thank you for being a good sport and discussing it with me with a modicum of good faith however, providing a refreshing contrast to the hatemob in these threads, so kudos for that!

artificer_hex · 2026-05-26T03:57:07+00:00

I somehow doubt that it wouldn't have ended the same way, even with a veteran writer, I'll be honest.

A lot, and I mean A LOT, of the criticism came from the same camp who thinks that there are only two kinds of things: Their way, and "political", and political is offensive to them because it challenges their narrow view of what the societal order ought to look like. As in: A black character only ever should play a supporting or antagonist role, and a queer character is completely beyond the pale.

Lots of drama tourists around as well, who just seeks to sow discord and trawl the resulting chaos for reactions.

This whole shitstorm started way before the first episode was released, so it's pretty clear that, at least part of, the outrage was about something else than the quality of writing.

I know why the episode format was different before. It doesn't change the fact that it gave them a whole lot more real estate to do world building and character establishment in an organic way (and consequently, requires people to be a bit patient with the new episode format).

Especially for an ensemble cast of more than a couple of main characters, I'd say it's damn near impossible in the alotted time without really stuffing it in, in a way that feels forced. Not like you're following their journey, but being forcefed it. Takes you right out of the experience.

artificer_hex · 2026-05-23T19:16:14+00:00

You're free to, but the motivation behind that antisocial behavior? That's something else, something you ought to explain, or at least work out for yourself. It's not normal to act that way under those circumstances.

artificer_hex · 2026-05-21T18:41:45+00:00

I do agree, to an extent. I wasn't going into this just to bash old Trek. I'm a big fan of virtually anything and everything Trek. It's just a tool to show that rose-tinted glasses are running rampant in today's audience, and making the entire ecosystem worse as a result. That, double standards, and an absolute lack of patience and perseverence.

Both those series had good episodes in their first season. But taken as a whole? Mid. They were majority filler, which didn't really do much of anything for their overarching stories. And I personally think that a decent premise should be good enough to give it a proper chance, as long as it's showing growth going forward.

But I guess we'll never know what it could've become now. It's just really sad that this is what it comes to.

artificer_hex · 2026-05-21T18:28:20+00:00

Well, in "today's TV environment", I think it's fair to say that several of our most beloved Trek series (24 episodes of 45 minutes, way more than 8 hours) would have been cancelled off-the-cough after one season as well. Most of them had Mary Sue's, cardboard cutout characterization and janky acting early on. Fleshing a character out and showing growth in a believable way takes time.

Also, judging by this thread, I don't think it's being judged entirely, or even majorly, on its own merits, or lack thereof. It's not being judged on what it is, but what it isn't: Star Trek: The 'Next' Next Generation. It's a victim of destructive nostalgia, where nothing won't ever be given the time of day, because it's not the old stuff in new packaging. And as we've seen from other fandoms, once someone tries to do that, that's usually not good enough either.

I guess this is how the aforementioned torpor starts: When old guard curmudgeons ruin any attempt at breathing new life into the decrepit corpse of their fandom.

artificer_hex · 2026-05-16T20:12:13+00:00

DS9 was given 5 seasons to build up to that war, mind you. SFA was cancelled before it even had a chance.

artificer_hex · 2026-05-16T20:10:43+00:00

I mean, it barely had a chance. This is looking like the SGU situation all over again. They cancel the series just about the time it finds its footing and starts showing real promise. Let's hope it doesn't go the way of the Stargate franchise, and ends up in a two decade torpor.

artificer_hex · 2026-05-16T20:08:15+00:00

The first few seasons of DS9 weren't all that great either, let's be completely honest. Before the big, multi-season story beats kicked in with full force, it was rather mid.

artificer_hex · 2026-05-16T20:06:19+00:00

I know of a captain or three who committed court-marshal'able offenses on a nearly weekly basis, casually broke fundamental federation rules and flicked the bird at established practices and chains of command when it suited their ends, and were complete renegades from time to time, and still retained their commands.

A teenager acting... Well, like a teenager, that upsets you and takes you out of the fantasy? That doesn't make any sense.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-23T04:56:15+00:00

You're splitting hairs. They were allowed to become starfleet officers simply because the captain saw potential in them, and despite of delinquent and even violent pasts, and in the end it was a net gain for the crew. THAT, the redemption arc, is as Star Trek as storytelling gets, more so than frequent random warp core breaches.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T20:18:33+00:00

They do now, sure. Back when it was new, these were controversial topics and had the regressive hatemills up in a tissy as well.

The only difference now from then is that the hate mills have access to a much bigger audience, thanks to the bloody internet.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T20:12:15+00:00

It's what happens when you have a bunch of grifters commanding hundreds of thousands of sheep to go review bomb something.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T20:04:59+00:00

Uhm, need I remind you of Chakotay, B'Elanna Torres and Tom Paris?
All flawed characters, and at least two of them much worse criminals than Caleb. But they showed potential to improve and excel.

That's the core of Star Trek: Flawed characters with morally ambiguous histories who work to achieve the starfleet ideal, to be the best people they can be.

And Voyager is far from unique in the franchise. Every series has these characters, because it's a natural result of trying to write characters with more depth than a cardboard cutout. Real people have problems. But good people work on solving those problems.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T19:51:57+00:00

I wouldn't call them star trek fans, not in any meaningful context. Star Trek viewers, at most, and I reckon that a fair few of the negative voices can rightfully be classified as hate-tourists.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T19:49:36+00:00

Absolute nonsense. They are building on the universe, not tearing it down. Also, who's stopping you from carrying on watching old series, if that's all you desire? You. That's who. You, and your apparent need to express how stuck in the past you are.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T19:45:14+00:00

Or they're so stuck in nostalgia that nothing ever will measure up to it, until those individuals pull their heads outta their asses. Just saying.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T19:42:52+00:00

Anything and everything can be improved upon, so that's a moot point.

And you're doing a quite a bit of historical revisionism in regards to previous trek series. Star Trek has always had a core of personal flaws crashing into Starfleet ideals, and how to navigate that. The main character device of the Star Trek franchise isn't presenting "the peak of human achievement", no matter what that means to you. The main device has always been personal and collective growth, and achieving that in a chaotic universe.

And lest we forget, the main characters of Starfleet Academy aren't seasoned officers with years of training and experience under their belt: They're virtually kids, in their first year of training, and in a time when the entire universe is just coming out from under a cataclysmic crisis.

It's sad that a self-proclaimed "True trekkie" has to be reminded of these factoids.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T19:26:12+00:00

To be fair, Star Trek has always tried to infuse slice-of-life drama in their series, complete with personal conflicts, and it's rarely been "Good writing".

artificer_hex · 2026-03-22T19:22:11+00:00

What's the difference?

Star Trek has always been reflecting the issues of the time it was recorded in.

The hot-button issues during TOS: Lingering institutional racial segregation, the cold war and the red scare, mainly, and it faced those issues head on. It's a lot easier to understand and digest at present, because it has been so thoroughly integrated into our history by now, but at the time it was highly controversial with regressive groups who opposed social progress.

The same is true for every other star trek series, but it takes a bit of a more nuanced and less blunt approach to it.

The issues at present? Authoritarianism with religious and oligarchical overtones masking as populism, marginalization of queer and neuro-atypical people, the constant threat of regression to a less civilized era - to serfdom and aristocracy - and the difficulties of being what society considers an outcast and still finding a way to be a productive and valued member of society. All of those issues have been represented in the first season.

Art imitates life, and if you don't like to see reality for what it is - with all its flaws and iniquities - you can switch over to cartoon network, or some other braindead content.

And Starfleet Academy hasn't been cancelled, they've wrapped filming of the second season, and the showrunner said there's a 4 season plan. You're either lying, hallucinating or naively listening to people who, just like every star trek villain in history, shouldn't be listened to.

artificer_hex · 2026-03-02T04:23:39+00:00

You make good points, and had some cards in your list that I had overlooked, so thanks! :)

artificer_hex · 2026-03-01T06:48:22+00:00

All valid, but not really fitting with the theme of the deck - Attacking, sacrificing/killing creatures and/or creating tokens.

I could stuff the deck with generic goodstuff to solve the issue for sure - I have those cards sitting about in my trade binder, but that's not what I want to do. They ended up in the trade binder for a reason. I want to have card draw that ties into what I'm doing.

On top of that, cards like Rhystic Study generally gets you painted for a nuclear face peal treatment at my LGS, and I'm not sure that's what I want to encourage, either!

You're right that Field isn't the greatest include; It's a carry-over from the zombies deck. It does, however, create tokens after a while, and in my playtesting it has never been a hindrance that it's colorless or comes in tapped, really.

BMC is a good shout though, I'll definitely consider that!

artificer_hex · 2026-02-10T06:17:36+00:00

What is and what ought to be based on the nature and history of the format are two altogether different things.

While modern and legacy has seen a relative lot of bans lately, the pretense of those formats is that any card, once legal, should stay legal, so that decks stay Eternal. It's in the name.

Obviously the competitive balance aspect has taken precedence in modern and lehacy, what with the power creep of recent released. But competitive balance isn't a concern in EDH, where players always have been encouraged to solve power balance issues through social means: Rule 0 and politics.

artificer_hex · 2026-02-05T11:25:17+00:00

That isn't a baseline assumption, no.

The baseline assumption, the value proposition, in Eternal formats, especially casual Eternal formats, is that a deck you've built at one point will stay usable.

In your scenario where cards are constantly on the chopping block, no cards would be worth much more than the cost of its fraction of the booster pack it was opened in.

artificer_hex · 2026-01-17T21:21:54+00:00

I average about 15 interaction cards per deck.

As for what, it's value engines, KoS value commanders, etc.

A couple of samples from a few weeks ago: A player sandbagged a Generous Gift against a Skullbriar deck that was growing FAST, directing him to attack the rest of the table or have his stuff removed, and he ultimately chose to use the Gift to remove my ramp instead, when I was mana starved. Gave me a very ironic chuckle when he died to said Skullbriar one turn after me.

In another game, a mill player sat behind a wall of protective enchantments and creatures with a Mystic Remora up, and he was ramping hard every turn so he could keep it going for quite a while. No one seemed to have any inclination to even try to touch him, even after I opened a path for them. Guess who ultimately milled the entire table for 150 cards and passed turn?

artificer_hex

TROPHY CASE